There are serious errors in your form submission, please see below for details.

Search RTI Appeal

List of RTI Appeal

SNo. Registration No Appellate Authority Name Received date Reply Appeal Reply Doc
1891 CICOM/A/P/22/00002 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 14-01-2022 आर. टी. आई. आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/P/21/00647 के प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रेषित की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों एवं मांगी गई सूचना के अनुसार ही है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। NA
1892 CICOM/A/P/22/00003 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 14-01-2022 आर. टी. आई. आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/P/21/00623 के प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रेषित की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों एवं मांगी गई सूचना के अनुसार ही है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। NA
1893 CICOM/A/P/22/00004 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 14-01-2022 आर टी आई आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील आवेदन का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया है कि केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा दिनांक 21.10.2021 को सूचना प्रेषित की गई है एवं अपीलकर्ता द्वारा प्रथम अपील आवेदन दिनांक 06/01/2022 को प्रेषित किया गया है। सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम, 2005 के तहत प्रथम अपील आवेदन सूचना प्राप्ति के 30 दिनों के भीतर ही दाखिल किया जाना अपेक्षित है। अपीलकर्ता द्वारा देर से प्रथम अपील दाखिल किये जाने का कोई कारण भी नहीं बताया गया है। अतः उक्त तथ्यों के आधार पर प्रथम अपील ख़ारिज की जाती है। NA
1894 CICOM/A/E/22/00016 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 14-01-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/T/22/00005 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating : CICOM/R/T/22/00005 FAA is requested to again open this matter of two fully transferred applications to cic having no concern with IT management of rtionline portal and send to concerned public authorities rather than illegally advocating them by closing applications from their side after fully transfer as by delinquent CPIO without disclosing name . (1) LEARNED delinquent CPIO IS NOT EXPECTED TO WORK AS HIRED ADVOCATE FOR OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITIES without any concern without being custodian of record as in this vague reply and illegal closure without specifying original application out of two transferred applications. (2) After illegal closure of application with entirely vague reply, CPIO has deprieved me from filing first appeal to original public authority also in addition to habitual vague closure of application with vague replies. (3) As in rtionline portal , there is no provision of filing first appeal after transfer to other public authority . So due to misconduct of delinquent CPIO in undue closure of application, I am helpless to file my first appeal to the concerned authorities DoPT, NIC which are responsible for creation of 48 hours link. (4) In rajasthan state online portal, there is separate link of 48 hours information IN APPLICATIONS,FIRST APPEALS needing evidence of urgency in separate uploading file link. So delinquent CPIO mindlessly closed application by assuming adding of separate link APPLICATIONS,FIRST APPEALS to be rocket science needing several years AND ILLEGALLY ADVOCATING DOPT, NIC. (5) FAA is requested to again open this matter and send to concerned public authorities rather than illegally advocating them by closing applications from their side after fully transfer. (6) FAA is requested to provide me opportunity to file first appeal with original public authority rather than illegally sitting over any application any matter as previously by DISCLOSING ORIGINAL PUBLIC AUTHORITY OF THIS TRANSFERRED APPLICATION and recommending action against such delinquent CPIO. DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collect information that is not a part of the record. He is also not required to segregate, interpret information or decision of CIC. In the instant case, the RTI Application No. CICOM/R/T/22/00005 was transferred from DOP&T to CIC and the CPIO has provided information as per the records. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1895 CICOM/A/E/22/00017 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 14-01-2022 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating : CICOM/R/T/22/00004 FAA is requested to again open this matter of two fully transferred applications to cic having no concern with IT management of rtionline portal and send to concerned public authorities rather than illegally advocating them by closing applications from their side after fully transfer as by delinquent CPIO without disclosing name . (1) LEARNED delinquent CPIO IS NOT EXPECTED TO WORK AS HIRED ADVOCATE FOR OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITIES without any concern without being custodian of record as in this vague reply and illegal closure without specifying original application out of two transferred applications. (2) After illegal closure of application with entirely vague reply, CPIO has deprieved me from filing first appeal to original public authority also in addition to habitual vague closure of application with vague replies. (3) As in rtionline portal , there is no provision of filing first appeal after transfer to other public authority . So due to misconduct of delinquent CPIO in undue closure of application, I am helpless to file my first appeal to the concerned authorities DoPT, NIC which are responsible for creation of 48 hours link. (4) In rajasthan state online portal, there is separate link of 48 hours information IN APPLICATIONS,FIRST APPEALS needing evidence of urgency in separate uploading file link. So delinquent CPIO mindlessly closed application by assuming adding of separate link APPLICATIONS,FIRST APPEALS to be rocket science needing several years AND ILLEGALLY ADVOCATING DOPT, NIC. (5) FAA is requested to again open this matter and send to concerned public authorities rather than illegally advocating them by closing applications from their side after fully transfer. (6) FAA is requested to provide me opportunity to file first appeal with original public authority rather than illegally sitting over any application any matter as previously by DISCLOSING ORIGINAL PUBLIC AUTHORITY OF THIS TRANSFERRED APPLICATION and recommending action against such delinquent CPIO. DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collect information that is not a part of the record. He is also not required to segregate, interpret information or decision of CIC. In the instant case, the RTI Application No. CICOM/R/T/22/00004 was transferred from DOP&T to CIC and the CPIO has provided information as per the records. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1896 CICOM/A/E/22/00011 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 09-01-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/21/01096 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating: 1. My Objection and Appeal:- After submitting my non-compliance report in web link I received emails alerts and shows in my mobile CIC application. On 22.11.2021 I call to this communication and ask my non-compliance matter. But the CPIO was states my non-compliance report is not available in record. So what about this below mentioned the particulars? My humble request you please provide dated 17.11.2021 my noncompliance report 2. In my RTI online Application SCRVD/R/2019/50073, dt. 23.09.2019. I sought about 3 items of information. My Appeal:- (a).In your office CPIO reply 5 pages these details are fully not there. So you please provide correct information. (b) Your office CPIO reply 5 pages these details are not there. So you please provide in u/s 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act, 2005 information of the Vijayawada DRM office. (c) Your office CPIO reply 5 pages these details are not there. So you please provide information of my letter. DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. The CPIO-CIC has provided information as per the records of the Commission. As per Section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collect information that is not a part of the record. In the instant case, the appellant in his RTI application has mentioned non compliance letter dated 17.11.2021 and the document attached with the first appeal application, the date of noncompliance report pertains to 18.11.2021. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1897 CICOM/A/E/22/00009 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 09-01-2022 ऑनलाइन आर. टी. आई, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील का का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि आर. टी.आई. आवेदन संख्या CICOM/R/E/21/01039 के बिंदु संख्या 1, 2 एवं 3 के तहत प्रदान की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम, 2005 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार ही है। परन्तु, आर.टी.आई. आवेदन के बिंदु संख्या 4, 5, 6, 7 एवं 8 के प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी (DR to IC (UM) द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम, 2005 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार नहीं है, इसलिए केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी (DR to IC (UM) को निर्देश दिया जाता है कि इस आदेश के प्राप्ति के पांच दिन के भीतर आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/E/21/01039 के बिंदु सं. 4, 5, 6, 7 एवं 8 अगर आपके कार्यालय से सम्बंधित नहीं है तो सम्बंधित केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी को अग्रसारित करें। इस पत्र की प्राप्ति के 20 दिनों के अंदर इसका निपटारा किया जाए। तथापि, प्रदान की गई जानकारी यदि कोई हो तो अपीलकर्ता को निःशुल्क प्रदान की जाए। NA
1898 CICOM/A/E/22/00010 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 09-01-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/21/01112 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating : GROUNDS FOR APPEAL 1.My RTI request (A) requesting information on the reasons recorded if any, for not invoking powers under sec.19.8 of RTI Act for ensuring compliance with order dd. 1.10.2021 of IC(B), was answered by CPIO vide letter dd.4.1.2022 (C)with annexure, is not satisfactory for the following reasons: a) The IC order(B) was issued after due application of mind, and after taking into consideration my submission dd.13.9.2021(D) as mentioned in last para. of page 3 of order(B), that reiterated my request for report of MOD dd.2.7.2019 mentioned in para.1 of CVC OM dd.22.10.2019(E). b). Accordingly, operative part of order(B) specifically mentions in last para to ‘provide the AVAILABLE COPY OF THE AVERRED RESPONSE/REPORT OF MOD TO THE APPELLANT etc’. c). However, despite the clear order, CPIO, CVC has furnished extract from files of MOD, as mentioned in para.5 of CVC OM dd.22.10.2019(E), as evident from para.2 of CPIO,CVC letter dd.8.12.2021 annexed to (C). 2.(a) Therefore CPIO,CIC letter (C) confirming compliance is incorrect, when there is clear non-compliance by CPIO, CVC, as mentioned above. (b)Statement of CPIO,CIC in para.2 of letter dd.4.1.20211((C) is incorrect, since I had not made query, but requested info. on REASONS RECORDED IF ANY etc. 3. The contents of CPIO,CIC letter (C) tantamounts to Review of IC’s own order(B), which is prohibited in terms of ruling in CIC final order dd. 19.6.2018 in CIC/DOHIN/2017/15478-BJ. 4. It is therefore requested that CPIO,CIC be directed to put up non compliance to Hon’ble IC, for exercising powers to ensure compliance with IC order dd.1.10.2021(B). DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. The CPIO-CIC has provided information as per the records of the Commission. As per Section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collect information that is not a part of the record. He is also not required to interpret information or decision of CIC. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1899 CICOM/A/E/22/00006 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 06-01-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/21/01226 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating : Why ibps is selecting other state student in clerk post in karnataka if finance minister said in sslc Or one of subject should be studied kannada language as a one subject then why this ibps board is doing like selecting other state students in clerk post in Karnataka DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collect information that is not a part of the record. In the instant case, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 as the subject matter in the RTI application is not related to Central Information Commission. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1900 CICOM/A/E/22/00007 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 06-01-2022 ऑनलाइन आर. टी. आई. आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/E/21/01201 के प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रेषित की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों एवं मांगी गई सूचना के अनुसार ही है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। NA